JEAN BAUDRILLARD

WHY HASN'T EVERYTHING ALREADY DISAPPEARED 7

TRANSLATED BY CHRIS TURNER
WITH IMACES BY ALAIN WlllAUME
Sugull Book.. 2009
Ib udrillard. i>oMrq" l1 /(J.N JI<lJ Ji.J4 tUfJ><l nJr
l3clmons L'I!ernt", 2(1(17
by nr.ongcmcm ,,j,h !",d irions dc 1 : Herne,
c/ o Agcn(;(' lmer.lIfe PIcHe & AU nghts rCK rv('.;I.
Engh;h tr.on;.bn(m C Om' Turna 2O.Y.l
Images C 1\1:.111 \'fillaulIlc 20()')
This compi1:ar ion C Sn b'llil Books 200')
FlrSI puhhshlm English hr iSoah, 2009
ISUN-IJ 9781 'JOM '} H 08
Rrilish Uhrary Cataloguing.in.Publicalion Data
A clrlll'1.'llC" ITcurd fur book a,",ubble
from II .. : Ihilhh 1 i br. .. r
and de.o;igncd by Sunlln<hni Ihncr lCC, Seagull Books
Pnmed at CDC i'nnlcrs 1>"'1 U.1. Cakulta
}
\
CONTe NTS
Foreword
\Vhy Hasn't Everything Already Dis:Jppem: d? 9
\.
I
FOREWORD
He that hath not, from him shall
be taken even that whi ch he hath
(? latthew 25: 29).1
' W' hy is there nothing rather than someth ing?'
Thi s is Lcibni z's '1ucstiot1, exactly reversed. It is
also a radical way of taking one's !c:wc of meta-
physics.
Tbr Joms is 1101 n Oll ' Oil hring, hul Oil tI)t
3
JAN BAUDRILLARD
;\ I:lccdonio Fert1:lndt,z. the l\rgen tini:Jn wnter
;Jnd friend of h:ld alre;Jch' r:lken the ex-
pl oration of tht, nUlhing [() grc:u
thing on-and incl uding- the Nothi ng, 011
the I'pthing, btu not entirely, On th(' j\uthing.
there more: some (If it s illlerstices. which are
IlUT11 I.: WlI S.'! Je:1I1 Ihudril b rd pushes its limit s
even furthl..'r :l nd the iT1l crstict.: s. It's a
question of bei ng logical. \\ c imaf,rlnl.:d th:lt Good
was the product of dimin:ll ing b il. tht, l: tert1:l 1
the product of dimin:lling the Tempor:!1 or the
All the product of dimin:ll ing the Nothing, AI -
W:lys thi s IOtalit:l ri an temptation to uni fy. to re-
duce dU:ll ity. [() dil11in:lte I: vil. to exterminate the
nothing. W'e ha\'e rid of the :t l11biguit y
of I hI.: world.
\'\ e ha\"e (0 to with , hc nothing;
thi s Ihe grc:t l game and the gr:tl1d style: 'the
j\othing is esscllli:d to life:t s :u c air and wind
to the !l ight of the do\'c::
1
a reference to t-.: alll 's
'light dm'C" which imagi nes it would fh beller if
i, could overcome :til resist:t flcc.
,
WHY HASN'T EVE RYTH ING ALREADY DISAPPEARED?
Nihili sm? 10, nihili sm is precisely the fo r-
getting of the nothing. It is the system th:tt is ni -
hi listic through its power to consign everyt hing
to indifference. 'f he systcm is '!rul y negn ioni st',
to usc 13:t udrilbrd's expression. it is a denial
of the nothing. a denial of :111 illusion. There re-
mains the ch:tll cnge o f radi cal tllOught which
gambl es on the world being illu:-> iun, which hr
pOlhcsizes Ihen: is nothing rather
than something :lnd which 'huill s cl own the no-
thing thai runs beneath the apparenl continui ty
of Il1 c:t ning' .
Thi s isn't :I cOlllr:t rr mctilphysics, but Ihl:
contrary of :I mct:lph}'sics.
5
\X'hen I spe:lk of timl:. it is n01 YCt
\,\' hen i spe:lk of :l pbce, it has disappc:m:d
\'\ hen i spe:lk o f a man. il!..' s already (Il::ld
\'\ hcn I spc:lk o f timc. it :ltrc:ldy is no Illtlrl:4
!.I .T l ' :-; Spl.., ..... then. of Ihe world from which
human beings ha\T di sappeared.
It 's a llUl:stioll uf di sappC:Ir.IIlCl:. n01 exhaus4
nnn, extinctitln or cxtermination. Thc cxh:lllsr.io n
of resources, th(' cx tinction uf spl:cics-thcse
are physi cal processes or narur:ll phenomena.
9
JfAN 8AUDRIlLARD
' \!ld th:lt 's the whole difference. The human
species is doubtless the only one to have Invcntcd
:l specific mode of di s:lppearllnce that h:l s noth.
ing 10 do with Nature's bw. Perhaps cven an :lr!
of di sappear:tnce.
l.ET'S BEGI1\: \'\ tTIl the dis:1 ppeara ncc of the re:ll.
We have talked enough abotH the murder of re-
aliry in the age of thc media. vi rru:11 re:11iry :md
networks, without enelui ring 10 :111\' IIre:lr degree
, ;:, ...
whcn the real began 10 exist. I f we look closely.
\\'e sec that the real world begi ns in the modern
c ,
:lge. with the deci sion to tr:t nsform the world ,
:1Ild 10 do so by means of science, an:ll\'tical
,
knowledge and the implementation of technol -
ogY- lh:lt is to say Ih:ll it begi ns, in Hannah
Arendt's words, wi th t he invention of an
Archil11cdean poi nt outsi de the world (on rhe
basis of the invention of the telescope by G:llilen
and the di scovery of modern mmhcma[ical cal-
culation) by which the n:u-ur:11 \\"orld is defini-
10
WHY HA SN'T EVERYTHI NG ALREADY DISAPPEARED ?
li vel y T hi s is the 1110ll1Clll whcn
human bei ngs, while sett ing abou t aO:ll ysi ng :lOci
transforming the wo rl d, rake thei r !ca\'e of it,
whi le at the same time lending it forcc of rcali ty.
\'('e may say, thcn, [hal lhc rcal wurld begi ns. par-
adOXIcall y, 10 disappear :1.1 the very samc tin1c :lS
it begins to exist.
By their c.:xce pt:ion:d f:l cuhr fur knuwl edge,
human beings, while giving meaning. valuc :I nd
reahty 10 the wo rl d, :1 t the S:\l11e ti me begi n :I
process of di ssolution (' to :In:il }'se' me:l ns liter:t.ll )'
' to di ssolve') .
But doubtless we have to go b:lck cven fur-
ther- as far as concept's :l nd bngu:lgc, By repre-
senti ng thi ngs to oursel ves, by nami ng them :l nd
conccprual izing them, hU1l1:l1l beings call them
into existence and at the same time h:-' slen their
doom, subtly det:lch thcm from their brUl e rcaliry"
ror eX:1111ple, the cbss struggle exists from the
moment names il. But it no doubt exists in
its greatest intensity only before being T1:ll11ed.
11
HAN 8AUORIllARO
\ltl' rW,trth, It mneh d('cJmcs. The 1110111COI ,I
thing t, tUllled, the moment Jnd
concept' tah' hold of It, t, the !l10Il1COI when 11
10 lo!'c II' lht' risk that II wIll
bcco!l1e a truth or impll'l: Itself ideology. \X'I:
I1U\ ',1\ the "a me of Ihe: l ' nconsciou:- and II' diS.
emcry Frcud. 111:- whe: n a Ihing i!' beginning
10 dl:o., tppclr thai dll' concl:pl appear:-;,
The 0"1. "';\\:0. I k gd, tllCS out at dusk.
T,lhe: gloh,lli/.llIon: If tl1l:rc i!'i so much t.tlk
of II.'" 01,\ IOU' t:lct, .1' Indi'plHablc realiry, lh,ll
I' perh,lp' bccau,e It I' no longer at II"
hl:lghl ,till! wc ;I re contending with "O!l1C.
thll1g d'e.
Tlm<; thl: rc.11 \'anl,hc:, Into Ihe concept. But
\\I1.It ., e\ l:Il Illorl: p;lrJeio,\lcal 1<; the ('xactl, op
pO ... I1C: 1ll0\ l'l1ll'1lI \\hICh concepr... ;tIlt! idea,
(but ;11'0 pIUIlI.l"les. utopia" dreams and til::-i rc.;)
\,1I11,h IIll0 their \Tn fultilmC:1l 1. \X 'h{'l1 en:f\
thing d"appcar, Il\ c'cc!'s of reality. \\'hc:n,
"
' j
,
.
.
'.
l
WHY HASN 'T EVERYTHI NG ALREADY DISAPPEARED?
thanks ro the deployment of a limi tless technol
ogy. both mental and materi al, human bei ngs are
capablc of fulfilling all their pOlcntiali ties :md, as
a consequence, di sappear, givi ng way to an :u ti
ficial world that expels them from it. to an integral
performance that is, in a sense, the highest stage
of materiali sm. (l\ larx: the idealist smge of inter
preration, and the irresistible tr:msformati on that
leads to a world without tis.) That world is per
fectl y objecti ve since there is no one left to see it.
Havi ng become purely operational. it no longer
has need of our representation. Indeed, there no
longer is any possible representation of iT.
For, if what is proper to human beings is not
to realize all their possi bili ties, it is of the essence
of the technical object 10 exhaust its possibilities
and even to go quite some way beyond them,
stakjng out in that way the definitive demarca-
tion line between technical objects and human
beings, ro the point of deploying an infinite
opera tional potential agai nst human bei ngs
I S
JEAN BAUORlllARO
thcm ... c!n:s .IIH\ sooner or later. their
d''>'lppc'lrancc.
Thu .... the Illodern world forc<;.cen by ,\I an.
dmcl1 011 the work of Ihe ncgau\'C, by the CIl -
gmt: of col1tr:ullction. bcc:1mc, by the \'cry excess
of liS fulfilmcllt. another world in which thing!'>
no long1..' r ('\TIl need their opposites in order to
Oi ... l, in which I1ghl no longer needs sh:tdc, the
fl:l11in1l1c no \ongcr needs the masculine (o r vicc
\cr ... a?), good no longcr need ... c\' ll- and the
world no longer need, us.
I I 1 ... \u:n: we 'iCC thm the mode of (I!sappc:u-
,l11el: of the: hUIlUI1 (and n:lIur:llly of cn:rythmg
rd<ltni 10 11 Gunther \nelcr .. oUldau:dncs .. of
human lX'lIlg.... the cchp ... c: of nilies. etc.) is pre.>
cl\ch the product of :\11 Internal logic. of a built
in ob"oil:',ccncc, of the hum:1Il mce's fulfilment
of II' mo'" g r;lndio, c projcct. the Promcthc:\11
prolect of nla!'tcnng the.: uni versc, of accJuiring
c:-.hauslln:: htlowlcdge. \,\ 'c: ttlO, that il is Ihi ..
which pn.'clpltalc<; 11 tow:\rd" liS dis:\ppcamncc.
I.
WHY HASN' T EVE RYTH I NG A LREADY DISAPPEARE D ?
much mo re cluiekl y than animal species, by the
:tccel er:nio n it imp:tns 10 :t n evoluti o n th:'! t no
lungt: f has anything n:u ur:il :il)oUI iT.
Do ing so not out of d t: adl o r
some inVillutive. d ispOSiti o n towa rd
undiffere ntiat ed fo rms. but fro m :\11 impul se to
go :ts far as possible in Ihe of :,11 il s
po wer, all it s f;'tculti es- IO the point even o f
dreanllng of abo hsh1l1g death,
Now, \\'h:lt is muSI surpri sing IS Ih al th is
amount s to the: S:ll11e th ing. Thi s extrelll e
dellvo ur o n the pari o f li fe (o r n f if. by that
te rm, o ne understands Ihe depl oyment of :111
capaCi t ies, t h t.: deepe ning u f kno wkdgc, con-
sci o usness :lndjollissflllrt') :lrri vt:s :1I Iht: saill e o ut-
come: the vinu:'! l di sappc:'! rance of ,hc hUI1l ;'t1l
species, as tho ugh th:1I destiny were programmed
somt:where li nd we were merely d Ie long-Te rm
exeClIl:lnl S uf the prugramme (which irresistibly
brings to mind flpoplosis. Ihat prucess by which a
cell is pre-programmed to die).
19
JEAN BAUDRlllARD
All this may gin : Ihe impression or illusion
of a raw. 1 sLnncgr. of an evolution at the end of
which we would h:1\"e passed beyond thai
vani shing point Cancili speaks of, where, wilh
uut realizi ng it, Ihe human race would have left
reali ty and hislOrr behind, where any distinction
bet,veen the tr ue :l nd , he fal st: would have
di sappeared, etc.
1I
In which cast: \\'e and our bodies would be
mncly the phanlOll1 limb. the weak link. the in-
Emlile.: mabdy of :I technological appararus that
dominates LI S n:moldy Gust as thought would be
merely the inf:mti le mabdy of AI or the hllm:m
being the infantile malady of the machine or the
real the inf:mtilc maladr of the \irrual). All this
reillains confined still wil hin an evolutionary per
spcClive th:u seTS evcrything in tcrms of a linear
tr:ljeclor y, from urigin to end, frolll cause to
cffcct, from birth to death, from appearanct: 10
cii sappca n l nee.
20
WHY HASN'T EVERYTHING ALREADY DISAPPEARED?
But disappearance 11l:l}' be concei'-ed differ
endy: as a singular event and the obiect uf a
specific desire, the desire no longer to be there.
which is not negati ve at all. QUi lC to the contrary,
disappearance may be the desire to sec what the
world looks like in our absence (phutography) or
lO see, beyond the end, beyond the subject. be
yond all meaning, beyond thc hurizun of disap.
pea rance, if there sti ll is an occurrence of the
world, an unprogramillcd nppear:lIl CC of things.
i\ domain of pure appearance. of the world as it
is (and not of the r'lI/ world, which is only ever the
w'Orld of represcnmtion). which can eillerge onlr
from the disappearance of all the added values.
'fherc arc here the first fruit's of :111 an of dis
appearance, of anotlll:r Slr.ll cgr. The dissolution
of val lies, of the real. of ideologies. of ultim:lt c
ends.
But there is simultaneously a game, the pos
sibi lity of playi ng wi lh all these things; the pos
sibility of an an, though 11 0 1 in any W:1y:111 an in
21
JEAN BAUORlllARO
the cultural :lIld sense, but sOlllething
clo"er to:1 marna I an.
,\n It<;clf In the modern period only
on the ba<;l<; of It<; cltsappearance-not JUSt the
of making the real disappear and supplaming
it with antHher :->cc ne, but the lift of abolishing
IIself 111 the course of its practice (I lcgcl). It was
br doing this that it cOl1sli tLlII . .:d an e"elll, thm it
wa .. of (kcisi\'e importance. I say 'was'
fur art today, though \I has disappeared, doesn't
know It has disappeared and-this is the worst
of it-conunues on its trajectory in a \,cget:lli\,e
';;Iale.
,\nd become ... the par:tdigm of c\'erything
that sur\'\\es it, o\\'n dis:tppc:trance. There arc
tho<;c who phn on their disappt:amnec, make lISC
of il :\'> :I 1t\,1Ilg form, l'Xploit it by excess, and
there arc tl1O:-e who :Ire in a stale of disappear-
ance :lnd who survive it by default. It is dear that
the political scene, for cX:llllple. merely reneets
the shado\\'s of a cave and the--disembodied-
2l

WHY HASN'T EVE RYTHING AL READY DISAPPEAREO?
bei ngs lhal muve around in it, but do su (Illi te
unwitti ngly (it wo uld take 100 lo ng 10 li st every-
thing 1hat has di sappeared in th is war-institu-
tiom, nducs, indi vid ua ls). It is, unfo nunat cly,
(Illit e pussibl e thaI wt: oursel ves, as a species,
al ready form pan- in the form of cloning, con1-
plil criz:1.tion and t.he netwo rks, for ex:unplc-of
th is artifi ci:d sur vival , of rhi s prolong:nion 10
perpcrui ry uf so methi ng ,h:11 has disappeared,
but JUSt keeps on and on disappeari ng. \,'I/ hcre ls
the whole an is 10 know how 10 disappe:lf be-
fo re dying and instead of dying.
At any ratc, no thing JUS t v:t nishcs: o f every-
th ing ,hal di sappears there remain traces. The
pro blem is what remain s when everything l1:1.s
di:mppcllred. It 's a bi t likt: Lewis Cnrroll's
Cheshire Cat, whose grin still hovers in the air
after the rest of him ha s vani shed. Or like the
judgement of God: God di sappears, but he
!cil\es behind hi s judgement . N u \ \ ~ a ca t's grin is
already something Icrrif}'ing, but the g rin wi th
o ut rhe cat is even more terrifying .. . Ane! God's
25
JEAN 8AUORIllARO
is terrifying in itself, but the judgt:.
mCIlI of GIKI without God . , .
\X'c,: l1l:l y thus suppose that c\'erything that
disappc:lrs-insri rution!', \'alues. prohibitions. ide
olo,l!;ics. even ide:ls--cominues to le:ld a cbndes-
ti ne t:XiSICIlCC t:xert :ln ocellI! influence, as was
s:lid of Ihe :lIlcit:nt gods who, in the Chri sri:l l1 era.
ass ulllt:d the fo rm of demons. 1':\,ervthill 11 th:1I
,
dis:lppe:l rs seeps back int u our Jives in infinitcsi-
Illal dose!' , often more (bngerous than the visible
authority ruled {)\,t:r LI S. In our age of IOler-
ance and tml1$parency, prohibitions, controls and
inequaliti t.:s disappear one by one, btu onl y thc
bener 10 bc imernali z('d in the sphcre. \XC
might even suppose ourselves to be following in
the of our prt:\' iolls li\'t:s, not to spellk of
the Unconsciolls. Nothi ng c\'cr di sappears. !JUI
let's not get into pampsrchology. l .ct's star wi th
psycholo,l!,r and look :l little at the di sappear:lnce
of the subject, which is, more or less, the mirror
image of the di sappcllr:lIlce of the rcal.
26
WH Y HAS N't EVERytHI NG ALREAOY OISAPPARE07
And in f:lel thc subjt:ct- tht: :-. uhject as
agency of wi ll. o f freedom. of represen tation:
the subject of power. of knowledge. o f his-
tory-is di s:l ppe:lTing. but it le:l\'l,:s its ghosl be-
hind. its nllrci ssistic doubk, Illore or less :IS the
C:l t left ils grin hovering. The subject disapp{'ars,
gives way to a diffuse, /loaling. insubsl:lllti :ll sub-
jectivity, all ectoplasm that envelops e\' crything
li nd tnlll sfn rms evcrything into an immcnse
sounding board for a di sembodietl, empt y con-
sciousness-ali things radiating nut from :I sub-
jcc[i\'ity \\'ithOlil objecl; c:lCh monad. each
molecule caughl in the toil s of:l defi nitive narcis-
sism, a pcrpcftl:ll image-playback. This is thc im:lgc
uf an end-of-\\urld subjcctivit y, :I for
an cnd of the wo rld from which the subject as
such h:ls di sappe:l red. no longer h:l\'ing anything
left to gmpple \\'ith. The subjt:ct is the victim of
this b fefu l rurn of t:\'eIlf S, and, in a Sensc, it no
longer has anything st:lnding over :lg:liTl SI it- nei-
ther objects, nor the real. nor the Other.
27
JEAI\I
()ur grc.:;ltt.: .. l now dut':Hen u ..
\\"lIh tht'lr th"appe:lr:lncc.
1111 (.K1 \I 1)1:-. \Pl'l \R \'( 1 I:-! 'OT, then. simply
L1ut of the \Irllul Ir.lI1 ... mul:ltion of of
IIw lIIisf (II (/"11111" of n.:(\l1n, hut that of Ihe diYI
'Hl!1of tht.: ,uhltTI 10 IIlfinuy. of a serial pulver-
1/,111011 of con .. imo all the
of realin. \,'c.: might ";1\, at a pinch, rhat con
"Ctou"oc .... (Ihe "ill, frecdom) is everywhere; 11
mc.:rge .. \\"lIh tht' course of and. a" a rt.: .. uh.
become .... upertlllou", This is the analysis CaHIi -
lullblllllgcr hllll .. clf made of re1i,!-,rion: a rehwon
which accommod,Ht'" to the world. which at-
lune .. lI .. clf 10 the (pohtlcal. social ... ) ,,orld. he-
C011ll'" 'iupertlllous. It I .. for the samc rC:lSOi1-
bcelll't.: II hCCllllC merged with ob-
ICC tin.' han:lhn'-that .ut. ceasing to be different
from life. ha .. bl:comc
Onl: might argue, alternatively. Ihat there
h:\\I.: been po .. iti\'(: of vio-
lence. threats. or dt.::llh, but we know that
'8
,
0
WHY HASN'T eVERYTHING ALREADY DISAPPEARED?
everything repressed or eliminated in this way re-
sults in a malign, viral infiltration of the social
and individual body.
IT IS, THEREFORE, IMPOSSIBLE to assign disap-
pearance--disappearance as form-to some par-
ticular purpose or end (any more than we can
with appearance indeed), either in the order of
Good or In the order of EviL Apart from all the
phantasies we maintain around it-and in the en-
tirely justified hope of seeing a certain number
of things disappear ooet: and for all-we must
give disappearance back its prestige or, quite sim-
ply, its power, its impact. We must reinvest it not
as a final but as an immanent dimension-l
would even say as a vital dimension of existence.
Things live onJy on the basis of their digappear-
ance, and, if one wishes to interpret them with
entire lucidity, one must do so as a function of
their disappearance. There is no better analytical
grid.
31
JEAN BAUDRlllARD
I' (\ IV I.l!)J()'. J \t.J . :-.TKI _":-. the total ambigu-
ilY of Oll r relation tu the rt.:;J1 ;Jnd its dis:lppc:lr-
anct.:. Bt.:hind evcry sOlllethin!4
Ami Ihal is the source of its fasci -
na llon. Behind \'irilial rea lity in all ils forms
(tc1ematics, IT. eli giliz:llion. etc.), the rcal has dis-
appeared. t\nel that is Wh:ll fa!'cinalcs C\'l;f\'one,
According 10 the official version. we worship tht:
real :lnd the reali ty principl e, but-and this is tht.:
source of all the CU ff C11I suspense- is it. in fact.
tht.: re:ll we worshi p. or its di sappearancc?
\'\'e may. then. take thc sallle gencr:ll si tua-
tion-cxactly the sal111;-c.:i ther a curse.:1S the
commonplacc critical versi on h:l s il. or:lS:1 pl eas-
ure into which we can rCtreat, :lS a h:lppy cven-
lU:llit y so to spc.:ak.
A contradictory twofuld posrulale thm C!1Il -
not , in :IIW \\':1\'. be resolved.
'1'111 FI t"\. I-.5T IU.L:::.TIt\TIO;'\. o f this s),stcl11:l tic van-
ishing of a reality, whosc twil ight, as it were, one
31
,
WHY HASN'T EVERYTHI NG ALREADY DISAPPEARED'
savou rs, would be the cur rent desti ny of the
il11:lge. of the dis:1ppe:l r:lncc o f the image in the
ino:urablt:: mo\'t.: from tht: :In:.Jogic:ll to the digi -
tal. Tht.: of the imagt: being
for the invemion of the technical imag{' in a11l1s
forms is our laSt great il1\'cmiol1 in the unremit-
ting llLieSt for :I ll 'objeCl ive' re:tl ity, an objective
trllth (0 be mir rored to LI S by technology ... I t
would seem that the mirror has gOt caugh t up in
the and has transformed e\'crything into a
\'inual, digital, computerized , numeric;) 1 ' rc:d-
iry'- th c of the im:lge being merel y the
tiny detail of thi s anth rupulogical n: \'ulutinn.
ON THE HEGEMONIC AND THE DIGITAL, . ,
\X'hCI1, from aTl exct:ss of re:lliry, e\'erp hing dis-
appe:lrs th:ll1ks to the deployment o f :l limitless
mel1l:11 or ll1:lt cri!l.t technology, when hUIll!l.n be-
ings arc capabl e o f fulfi ll ing :ltl their pOlemi:ll i-
li es. then, by that \'cry lohn. they ent er a worl d
that expds thc.:m. Fu r, if it is char!l.cteri sli c of
33
HAN 8AUORIllARO
belllg!' not to fultil :til thei r potc.: nr ialitic!', it
IS of the essence of technical objects 1O e;.,.hawa
all of their" and to deplo} the.:m despite all op-
pO"lI1on. dC"I)ltc human beings them5cl\'e5.
\\'hich implic5. in the longer or shorter term, the
disappearance of humans. /\t the end of this ir-
resistibl e proCCS5, 1C:lding to a perfectly object i\'c
universe. \\'hich is, as it \\'ere, the supreme stage
of n.: ,dit)'. tht re i5 no subject any longer; there is
no OIlL: tht: rc 10 "ec H. That world no longer has
need of us. nor of our representation. f\nd the.:re
indeed. no longer am possible representation
of it.
'11) II J.I ...,n{ ,n 1IIIs Tit '\.=--ITI<)\. to the hegemonic,
there is no finer :In:tlog} than that of the photo-
graph has becol1lt: dl,lQTal. being liberated at
a s1l1gle stroke from bOlh the negalive :t nd the.:
real \\'orld. And the conseclllt:l1cCS of both these
things :Irc inc:tlcllbble, though Oil diffen: nt scales.
of cour!'t:. marks the end of a singubr
34
WHY HASN'T EVERYTHI NG AlR[ADV DISAPPARD?
presence for the objecl, since it 1n:1)" now be dig-
il:1ll )" Cl II1 Sl rtI Ctt:d, ,\ nd the l: nd of Ihe
mo ment o( the phtJlog r;lphic ;lCI. since the
1111;111e Gill now be immcdi :uck o r recon-
,
strucled, And the end of the irreful:lbl e
mony of Ihe negati ve, Bo th the timc-bg and
di stance di s:"I ppl' :"Ir :11 the ti lll e, :lIld with
thel11 th:"lt blank between objl:ct :lIld i l1l:"lge that
\\':"I S the ncg:"l l-j\t:. The tradition:ll phOlogr:lph is
:111 im:lge producl:d by Ihe world. which. th:..nks
to the medium of film. still i l1 voh'l:s:1 dimensi on
of represent ation. flle digital il1l:lge is an image
thai comes straigh t out of the screen ;lnd be-
comes submerge,-I in the uf :.. 11 the o ther
images from screens. II is of tht: order of flow,
and i!' :I prisoner 10 the aUIOI1l:l!i c operflli on of
the c:lI1, er:1. \X/hen caicublioll fmd the digital win
Ollt over fo rm, when softw:.. rc wins Ollt over the
eye, can we still spe:.. k of phi HI Igr:lphy?
J7
JEAN BAUDRIHARD
THb ;-"OT \ 11 RI.! Y " in the of
tcchnology: with thi s rurn to the digital. the
whole of :lIlalo/!,ue photography, the im:lge in
entirety-conceivcd the convergence of the
light from the obj ect with the light from the
gaze- is s:1 crificcd. is doomed furever. As
zmion ad":1l1cc!', soon there will no longer be any
film. :l1l y li ght -sensitive slIfbcc onto which things
inscribed t hemsd ves negati vely. f herc will onl y
be an image $oftw;1. fe a effect
running to thc bil1ionrh o f a pixel and, at the
same time, unprecedent ed e:-lse of pi cture-tak-
ing, of image-playback and o f rhe photo-syn-
thesis" of anything whatcver, Metaphori call y, the
sophistication of the play o f prcsence and ab-
sence, of appearance ;1. nd disappcamncc-allthe
sophi stication o f the photographic aCl -disap-
pcars wi th the coming of the digital (the phlll u,
gr:lphic act causes the object in its 'realit y' to
vani sh for a moment ; there is nothing o f the sort
in the virtu;1. 1 image, nor its digi t;1. 1 c;1.p ture- not
38
..
,

WHY HASN' t EVERYTHI NG AlREADY OlSAPPEARD
1
to mention the magic of the im:lgt.:'$ t.: l11 ergence
as it is developed),
It is the world and our vi sion of the wo rld
that is ch;1. nged by thi s.
PARTI Cl' L\ RI.Y 1;-': TIILSE TI\I I..S o ( ultra-
r3pid technulogical progress, the :Ibsurd ide l h3S
emerged of libemting' the re:ll by me;1. ns o f the
im;1.gc, :Inc! of ' libemtingO the image by l11e:1I1S of
the digiul. The 'liberation' of the rcal 3nd of the
il1l:lge arc s;1.id to be effects of profusion :md pro
liferation. Thi s is to forgctthe dcwcc of ch;1. 1lcnge
and risk involved in the pholOgT;1.phic act, the
and :Imbivalcncc ()f the relation to the ob-
ject- the ' failure' o f the !!;aze, we might say. That
is all esscnri:ll f O photo!!.raphy- and it is :t rare
thi ng! You cannot liberat e
Onc!.: again, thi s is :t Il JUSt one tiny example
o f what is happening on :1 m:tssivc scale in :IJl
fields-particularly in the fields of thought, con
ccpr s, bngu:tge and represent ation. The S:ltll C
39
JI AN 8AUORIUARO
dc<;um of (!1glll/;lllon looms o\er the world of
the Illlnd ;lIlcl IIll' whole range of thought.
\\111\\1 IllRt 1111 ;-,\\\1 :'(I'\RIO, term for
term: with programmes based on the 0/ I binan
con"lrLlCI, \\ hleh i" a kind of integral calculm.
Ihl' cnurc mbolic articulat ion of languag(' and
thought dl'i:tppe:lfs. Soon there will no longcr be
<In\" thought -sensltl\'e surf:tcc of confrontation,
;U1\ "u"pell"ion of thought between illUSion and
realu\'. There will be no bLinks any more. no SI -
lences. no cOlllradtcllon- just a single continu
Oll" 110\\, :t "lIlglc IIlll'grated Ci rCUIt. ,\nd
computer Intelligence lend .. Hsclf to--Of, more
accur.ucly, like the digital in the ca;;;e of tht:
lIll:1gc. forces us lillo- the same faciliry, the same
clpncit)u"ne"" ()f pn)(luclion and accumulation.
of 'photo '" of the whole of the possi -
ble n::11. Thl'- giganlic- illusion is to confuse
thought with :t proliferation of calculation:.- o r
photography wuh a prohfcr:Hlotl of ,\!lel
40
I
WHY HASN'T [V{RYTHING ALREADY DISAPP(ARED?
the fu rt he:r \\T W) in tha t d irutioll. tlll:
we Sh:lll be: from ,he the
of b()th. T he e:xtlrbital1t pri\' il q.:,c: granted 10 the
br:lin. no t in the but in :111
fields. is symplOmalic or this. i\:( )1 It) memion I,c
l ':ly's rCCt.:111 propos:ll on the amoullt
of hUIl1:Ul brain lilli e a\'ailable (for Coca Cob. :ld
vcn s) . which W:IS excc(xlcd in ill\'oiull tary cr ni .
cism :I nc! hy the p rupos:d uf the
I-i e:l d or Cul tllf:ll ,\fffliri' of the P:lris Cil"y 1 !:t IL
Chri stophe G irard: '\X' h:11 we w:lnt is 10 llI :lke the
brain anibb1c. no t fo r :Id\'cni :- int: :l.nd cflpitaL
but for Cult urt.: :md Creation!'
Il owc\'cr thi s ma\' be, what is totall,
. .'
hC:ldcd is (0 see the hrain :l S:l recei,'e r. :l synap-
lie Icrl11in:l1. :1 screen f'lr br:lill in r(':l l
rime (in thi s sense. it ii' , :11 :l pinch, k s", ah"tml to
corrd :lI c a 'rullctinn:d' b r:li n wit h :111 :ldn .: rti sing
m:lrke t ,h:\I1 to st..:e it a:- the \'chicle for ' Cre -
:lLiun'!). In short, in h 'cping wi dlthc abetTant as-
sllmplio n flf the whol e or cOllltlluniC:l1ioll
theory (' \'\ 'c arc all ull\\"illiTlt: receivers :lncl tr:lIl :--
.,
JEAN BAUORlllARO
l11il1c: r:o: "), once: you modd the: brni n o n comput -
t:rs, it :1S :1 super machine in the image of
othe: r digi tal l11:1chine: s, then the brnin and (\' ir-
tu:i1) realit y simpl y illt crf:1ce, o perate in a loop
with, or mirror, e::lch ot her in nccordance with :1
single progr:u111l1c- thc whole resulLing in what
we c:lll Aflifi cb l Intelligence o r AI. \,\Iilhin this
frame.: work , in which wc havc de.:fi nitively privi -
Ie.:ge:d the.: brain as a str.ll cgic source of tho ught-
:H the expense o f :l il y other fo rm of intelligence,
part icu1:1r1r the intel ligence of Evil , which is rd -
eg:ltnl to IIll: zonc of lIsd e:ss functions-\\"l' as-
sure it of Ilcge: mo nr. o f hegemo ni c power-
precisely in the like:ness of the power that reigns
in the geopolitical sphe.: rc. The: same mo nopoly,
the S:1I1lC pyramid:11 symhesis o f powers.
,\1.1. Till S an overall hegemo nic
proce:o::o:. :lnd thi s is \\'hy the digression o n pho-
tography :1nd the.: digit:11 can serve as the micro-
model for a generalized analys is of
44
WHY HASN'T EVERytHING ALREADY DISAPPEARED?
Fo r thaI hegemony i" notiling olht:r Ih:l11 the re-
absorption of any neg:lI i\' it y in human affair". the
reduction to the simpksl forlllub, the
formula to which the.: re i:o: 110 alt ern,lI ive:. 0/ 1-
pure difference o f pot enua1. Into wh ich the.: aim
is to have :l1l conl1i cI:' \', Ini:;; h digll:1l1y
THE VIOLE N CE DONE TO THE IMAGE
The \'iolence done to the im:1ge.: i:<> thc
viol ence of the: cgi-compul er-gencrc:l lcd
im:lgc-which emergc" r .... millfo from
calculation and the comput er.
This PlII S:111 e.: nd nCIl to the inl.lgil1lng of tll('
image. to its fundal1l cnt:11 'llIu,", lIm' in COI1l -
put er gcnernLio n, the III I I I lI1ge.:r and
lhcre: is no place e\'en tor the to 'ukc p1:1ce',
being pnKllIce:d a<; \ ' lff U.11 Realit y,
Diglt al pnxiliction Cr:1 ,",C'" the.: inugc ,11' (/",,10-
,ejJlr, it erases lhc rcal as :..( ltm:tl ltng c lp:lbk ( )f I.x.:i ng
' imagi ned' , The photogtilphlc :I( t, Ihi " lllon1c:!l1 of
of both the subject ,mel Ihl: o bject
in the same installl :mcou" confront.ll iol1- the
45
HA N BAUO RtUARO
shutter relc3se aix)hsilmg the world and the ga/c
for:1. Ill(HllCI1I, a fH'lik IIIOrl thai tnAAers
the maclllllic performance of the ima!!c--disap-
pear!' III digItal, Ilumcncal processing.
,\11 thts IC:lds Illc\'itnbly to the death of pho-
tography :, .. an original Illtxi iulll. \X'ilh the an:1-
loguc imagc it is the csscncc of photography that
T hat im:lgt: sti ll :ltlcSlcd 10 tht.: lh c
presence of :\ subject to :-tn objec[--{mc laSt rc-
pm"','!.: from the dl"'''Cllllnatl0!l and digital udal
\\,,)\ c th.u hc.:s 111 store for liS.
The problem of reference was already an al -
mo ... , lIl ... oluhlc one: how l'i 11 with the real? I low
., It \\ IIh n: prc<;t.:IlI:lf1on? BUI when, \\'lIh the \'ir-
lu,11. the n:f<.:rcl1I wht:n it
Into the technical programnllng of the il11:lge,
\\hell there I" no the SItU:1.tl0n of :1. rC:1.1
world :-ct o\'cr .again." a film (it i'l
the :-.I111e with 1.lI1gU:lgc, which is like.: the.:
tilm of idc;\.,), then there is, ultimatdy, no po:-:-.iblc.:
reprc<;CIlt:lIlOn :111\ more ..
46
I
WHY HASN'T EVE RYTHI NG AL READY DISAPPE ARED?
TIIERE IS \'('ORSE, \Vh:\{ di stinguishes thc an:lloguc
image is that it is the pbcc where a fo rm o f di s-
:lppeara ncc. of di st:lncc, of 'freezi ng' of the
world pl ays lI se1f out. "rh:l t nothi ngness al the
heart o f the im:lge which \X'arhol spokc o f.
\\;1hcre:ls, in thc digital image, Of, mOfe gen-
eraUy, t.he cgi, therc is no nCb":l.tive :lil y longer, no
<ti me lapse', Nothing dies or disappe:l rs there, The
image is merely the product of ,In inSl"fucti on and
a progr:lllllll c, aggravated by automat.i c di ssemi-
nation from onc medium to the other: comput er,
mobile phone, TV screen, elc.- the llutOTl1atic
nanlre of rhe network- respo nding 10 the auto-
mat.ic nature o f the construction o f the im:lgc.
So should we save absence? Should wc save
the void and thi s nothi ngness at the heart of the
image?
AI any mlC, rcmoving I11 c:l.Iling bri ngs our
thc essential point: namel y, thaI rhe iTl1 l1gC is more
important than what it speak s about-juSt as
language is morc important r.h:lTl what it signifies,
49
JEAN 8AUDRIllARD
BlT IT \It ST RI \ 1 \ 1' \1.1 1 , to itself in somc
i\ul n: /lecl lonl mediulll , 1101 r:l ke
ror :U1 It must r{' Il1:1in :I fiction, a f.-Ibk
and hence echo the irn:sukablc fiction o r the
C\'CI11 . It must nOi bc caught in its own trap or let
itself bl: imprisoned in 1111:
The worst thing, in our \' iew, is JUSt thi s im-
possibi li ty of a world withollt il11 age-pbyb:tck-
a world that is :t lways c:lught, capturcd, lil mcd
:l nd photographed e\'l: n 1>I.:fore it is This is
a T1lo!'l:t1 d:lI1gcr for the ' rc:l 1' world, but also for
the il11:tge. since. when it merges with the real and
si mpl y imlll erses it self in the real :md re cycks
ii, therc no longer is :l ny /1f)l as
cxct:ption,:ls illusion, :ls p:mtlld \\orld. In tht: \i-
!low in which wt: :Ire currentl y
Ihere i" n'l eVl: n the timL' 10 become an im:lge.
I dream of an illl :lgt: that would be the iail -
flrl' tllIlOlJltlliqllf of thl: world's singubrit y. :is
drl::ll1lt of b\ the Iconoclasts in the famous
Bynntinc controversy. T hey contended th:l ! only
50
WH Y HASN'T EVERYT HI NG ALREADY DISAPPEARED?
lhe illl:lge in which the divi nity W;IS dirc,:clly
prcsell1-:ls in the \'eil of Ihe Il ol } F:lcelll-w:I:-
:Il1t hcmic- :l1l foil"rf tllllolI/aliqllt' of lhe divine
(:I CC without :l ny hU111:l11 h:l nd int ervened
("acllt:iropuie1.ic'), through a ki nd of
priming analogous to thc m:g:lli n : or the phlli o.
graphic film. On the other h:md , they violcml y
rcjccred :11 1 icons prllduced by hlll1l:ll1 h:l nd
(,cheiropoil: lic') which for them were mere
lIbCr.l o f the di d nc,
By COll1 r:tSI, the photogr:lphic :lCI is. in :1
senst:, 'achei ropui elic'. As aut om:ltic li ght. writi ng
Ih:lt neither p:lsses through the real nor Ihe ide:t
uf the re:ll. pholOgf:tphy 1ll:1Y ht: by :tu
lut11:1t:ici t); 10 be the prutut)ve of :1 lit cr:llness of
the world, wi th no interference (mm human h:lIld.
The world produci ng itself :IS r:ldiC:11 illusion,
purt: tr.1ce, \\;thOlH :tlly simubtioll, without hum:tn
il1l er\'cmion :l nd, :lbo\'e all. not :ts truth, for, if
there is onc pnxluct of the hUI1l:lIll11ind,
th:t ! product is truth :tnc! objccti\T rC:llity.
51
HAN 8AUOII'llAIiO
T1I1IU /..., (.RI \1 \111 (T\IIO, 10 a<;cnbing mean
111j.{ 10 the photographiC 1Il1age, To do so I, to
nuke ohlec,,", ..,Irlkc ,I po<;c, \nd IhlllgS them-
"eke .. b q , ~ 1 1 1 10 po"e 111 the light of meaning as
"oon ;1" Ihl'Y fed a subject's ga7e upon them.
II \\ I \\ I '()"J \I \\ \" had the deep-scaled phan-
I.I"Y of a \\1 Irld lhal would go Oil \\'llhOUI liS? The
poetic lempI.lI10n 10 M.: e the world in Our ab-
"enCl:. free of am hUlllan, all -loo-human will?
The IIllen'l' plc;l"ure of poetic language li('s in
"cclng J.lIlguage opeC"lting on ils own. in its Illa
lenal,,\ :1.I1d lileralu\, without Iransitll1g through
. . .
lllean1l1g-thi" is wh:1I fasClnatcs us. It is il1('
same with anagrams or anamorphoses. with the
'figure in the ca rpel', l1 The \'nnishing Point of
l ':l1lguage.
\1 \, '()J PHOTO(,R WHY :1150 be said 10 fUI1Clion
as 'revealing', in the I\\'()-technical and mCla-
52
,
WHY HASN'T EVERyTHING AlREADY DISAPP[ARED?
physical- !<Oc nses of the word, of the 'i nngc in
the carpel' ? The V:mi shing Pllin! o f the Picrurc.
\I.ITY IS :1.ltn osl i n c vjLlhlc.: in
pholOgraphy. for the rcasoll th:u the C:lI1H:r.l (c:o: -
pccially the digital camcf':l) tuw:ml s till: in-
finite exploitation of its possi bilities. Fnr bck of
:1 11 intuiting of the dct:l il of the world. fo r want
of full y plumbing il s mC:lIling and cxh:llI sl ing ils
the scri:ll digil:'!l im:lgc fills ,he \'oid
by sclf-muILipli cuioll. In the limi l (:1St.' which is
o ur prescm condit ion. we arrive :11 an unstop-
pable seri es of shots.
But this is no longer :l photograph :Ind, lil er-
all y speaking. it is no (,\,(,11 :1.11 im:lgc. These
shot s may be said. r.ahcr. tn be pan o f the murder
of the image. Tha, murder is hei ng pe rpclF.lt ed
continually by aU the th:\I :lCculllubt<.' in se-
rics, in ,hcl1l:lt.ic' sequences. which illustrat e thc
same evcm tlt/lltlllSetll/l. which think they :l rc acclI-
mulating, but are, in fan, canC(.: lling e:tch t Hiler t Jut,
ti ll they reach the zero degree of inform:llioTl .
55
JEAN BAUDRILLARO
There j" a vi olence done to rhe world in rhls
way. but there :ilso a \'iolence done 10 tht:
image. h) Ihe uf images. j\;u\\', an
image has to be it has 10 have;: its own
symbol ic space. If they arc li\'ing images-'aes-
thetic' (. lu:ililY is not at issue hcn.:-thcy ensure
the of that by dimimlt -
ing an infinite number of other spaces frOln il.
There IS a perpetual ri\:tlry between (true) im-
ages. But it is exactly the o pposi te {oelay wilh the
digi 1:!1, when: Ihe parade of im:lgcs n:semblcs the
sC,] lIcncing o f the geno me.
Til L OI'I'O:-ITI. 1'I ', R':" IJI-CrJ\,I" would be phologra-
in liS pure :lbslr:lClioll- roIIi mmlltll'---el1vi -
sinning:1I1 alrc:ldy photog raphed world in one's
head- without there being :l ny need to material
ize it in aClu:l1 shut s- by imagi ning the world
preci sel y as the lens Ir:lnsforms it. The innt:r
ecstasy of photography. as it wcre.
56
I
WHY HASN" (VERYTHI NG ALREADY DISAPP[ ARED?
1\ total de regubtiol1 of the
togrnphy can get lost in :I mind boggling fr:lg-
I1KIlt:ltion. in :t technical delirium of visi bil it} at
all costs, where everything inSISt's on on
:l fr:tct:ll o r microscopic scale. It's not :ll1latt er of
disaplx.-aring into the pby of forms any more. but
of an automatic substitution. where the world it -
self zaps from one im:tge to the o ther in precisely
the S:Ulll.: way as the individunl c:m di ssolve him-
sel f imo the mental di:lspora o f ,he nt:\"wurks :tnd
thereby :utain a definiLi\' c spectrali!'y.
T hc ulLim:ttc stage o f thi s dc-regulation is
the cgi. From faked phutos of tht: dying Dinna to
srudio-manufacrured TV rt: pI Jrt s. tht: immediate
live shot. taken nt :111 irrevocable moment, is pas t
lInd gonl.:- b st gli mmcr of :lcrunlirr in a virtu:l1
dimension \\' herc im:lgcs no lo ngl.: r h:lvt: the
slightest connecrion wilh lime.
In the vinu:l1 im:lgc there's no longer any-
thing uf that punctual exactitude. Ih:1I p"l/rllllll in
time wh ich is the 'poim' w11l.:11 tht: :l11alugue
57
r
lEAN 8AUDRIllARD
muge \U, nude. In the pn't, 10 (he day" of the
'rcal world', so 10 .. peak, photography wa<;, as
Ihnhe"i argued, to an insuperable ab
"ence, to sOl1lethll1g lIUl had been once
,lIld for .111 IIIne. h)r 11" pan. rhe digital photo is
III real tlmc and bC;lrs witncss to something that
(bd nOI take place, btl! whose absence
Ill)t hll1g.
In till'. digiul hberahl'flllOIl of thc photo-
gr:1plllc act, 111 Ihl .. process in which
the medium Itself gcncral l;s mass-pnKluced im-
... \\'lIh no mher Il1lerCeS"lon but the techlllcal,
we C;\Il 'ee seriality 111 its consummate form. In
the licld of ullage ... Ihl .. 1<;, as it were. the e<ltll\'a-
iCI1I of .\1. \,\ 'e I1U\ Ihtl<, regard the Image .. taken
hy ;1 (lignal Cll1lCrn as an infinite
with ,III the pO"'lhditics of manipulallon,
correcllon, inugc pl:lyback and all rhe thing" that
afC 1Il1lhlnk,lbk in the 'analoguc' world. It "al .. o
the end of any suspensc: the image I:; thcrc:lt the.::
.. a me lillle as the scene- .l pnlmi .. cuity
58
WHY HASN'T EVERYT HI NG ALREADY DISAPPEARED ?
(what a m:l rvcl, by Contr:l::; t, is the slow gradual
risi ng to the surfact: of tht: imagt: in the Pobroid
camera!). 'fhl ::; i::; what the digi tal b ch: the rime
of emergence, failing which it is merel y a ran-
dom segment of the uni ver::; al pi xclli zation,
which no longc.: r has anything tv du with the
gaze, nor with the pia), of the negative. the play
of distance. A new view of the world, glob:t liz:t-
ci on's view o f the world: the subjection of every-
thing to :t single prugramme, the subjection of
:t ll images ('Q:t single 'genome', Thi s is why il is a
mi stake (Q regard the move 10 digit:t l as :t mere
techni cal advance, as :1 superior form of au-
!Umatia n or eyen, indeed, II finallibenu-inn of the
Image.
For this reall y is the b st straw. this :t spir:t tion
to d ear the way, with the digital, for the integral
im:1.ge, free from any real -world constraints. And
we would nor be forci ng the analog), if we ex-
lended this same revolution to hum:l n beings in
general , free no\\-; thank::; to this digital intelligence,
61
J(AN 8AUORIllARO
to oper:ll c within an illlcgr:-tl indi\'iduality, free
from all hislOry and $ubjl.:Cl.i\'c constraints ...
At the cnd-point of this ri se of the machim:,
in which al1 human intelligencc is encapsubted-
:1 ll1:1 chine which is now :Isstlfcd of total auton-
o my as a res ult- it is cl c:u that mankind exists
only :\I the COSt o f its 0 \\"11 dc:uh. It Ix:coll1cs illl -
Illort:'ll only by p:'l ying thl.: price of it s tcchn()log-
iC:'l1 di s:'lppC:lli UlCC, of its inscription in the digital
order (Ihl.: Ill CIl1:'l1 di:1!>pora of the networks).
\ !lU)1. (JI \ 1.1 \'1'(. tllc ide:1.1
spider, which !"pi ns its web and is sillluitaneously
spun by its web: Or bCller slill. ' I :1.111 1l0l the spi -
der who wC:I\'es Ihe web. and I am nut c\'cn a fl\'
c:lUglli in the wcb. I :tm the web it self. streaming
off in all directiuns with no centre and no self
Ih:lI I c:-In c:tllmy 0\\"n.'12
But Ihi s is Th e o pcn form of immortali ry and
in realiry. so far :IS t he human species is concerned.
62
I
,
WHY HASN'T EVRVTHING AlRAOV OISAPPARO?
the choice has been madc :l11d it is cmbod icd in
the supremacy of Artificial
IT IS ,\TTIIE OlT I' 1{ 1.l\IIT!'I of this: systcmat.ic di s-
appe::tral1ce, which h:1s, it would !"eelll. been uni -
vcrs:1.l ly acceptcd. but whose dynamic ulti mately
remains mys tcrious (\'\ '11:1.1 do digi fal drcam
o f ? as Philip r.::: . Dick might have :1. sked). thaI
somc rroubli ng p::t radoxiC:ll (llIcsliuns :trise:
1. Is ('\'crything doomcd 10 disllppea r---( Jr,
mo re precisely. hasn'l everyt hing already disap-
peared? (\\'hich connect!" lip with Ihc vcry dislant
p:mldox from a phi losophy th:1I nc\'cr was: Wi lY
IS TH ERE NOTIl ING R,ITII " R T ll tlN
SCHIETH ING')
2. \'\ 'hy isn't everything
3. \,\'c arc fa sci naTed by ,hc ph:l1 l1 :ISIll of :1I1
integral rcali fY. by fhe :llph:1 :md Olllct:a uf digi lal
progml11l11 ing. The rl.::l. i is the Ieitillotif :lnd ub-
sessio n of all di scourses. BUI arc we not fa r tess
63
JEAN BAUDRILLARD
fascmated by the real than b\ liS vanishing. liS
IneiuCt,lble dl..,apPC;lrJnce?
4. WhIch gin: ... me to the Inliy m,-srcnous
llllc..,,,on: how docs tim Irresistible global power
succeed 111 1I11differentiaung the world, in wiping
out Its c:\trcmc si ngularit y? ,\nd how can the
world be so vulnerable to thi.., IilJuicbtion, this dic-
t'llorship of integral re:tli ty, and how call it be fas -
cl11:Hed by it- not exactly fascinated by the real
but b ~ the disappcar:lI1cc of reality? There j ...
hO\\"(: \"cr, ,I coroll a[\' LO this: what is the source of
the fragIlity of thI S global power, of its ,ulnera-
hllny to mll)or ('\'CI1I", to c\-em .. that are imignif-
lClIltIII them<,cke<, (' fO)..'\IC (',-ems', terrorism. but
:tl"o the plctun:" from .\bu Ghr:ub, etc.)?
DOl I n l l ~ ~ , If \\'c ,lfC to a\"old these 1I1soiublc
llue"tlons. \n: ha\c ttl fefcr 10 thaI Olhcr amhro-
pologic:d rn-olutlon. exactly antithetical to our
cur rcnt diglt,ll ' re\"(}iutlllll ', that is never takcn
lilt<> con"'ldcLlIion (wc mIght cven sal it has
64
,
\
WHY HASN't EVERYTHING ALREADY DISAPPEAR EO'
nen;r re ill y bCl:n taken into except
in :1 Iluml)!.;r of r:lpidly s:lcrificed ht:resies).
DUi\ 1.1'1"'1'. The inviubblc golden rule of
dllalil"Y. And thcn.: ':o; no need ttl gn b:lck to :11\ .
thropology'5 roOl5 to rediscover thi 5 mdie:11 d e-
lllet11 of hllm:lt1 being; it is present everywhere:
it is what n OI onl y leavc:o; Ihe posed
:l bove etero:l lly in sLi spense, but :l lso etcrn:lll y
,hw:lrt s hum:ln undert akings (:lll b:lsed on syn
dH.:sis, intt..:gr:dity and lhe dclibcr:ll c forgelling of
all rCfr:lClOry forms, of everything that cannot or
wil l not be in tt..:grated or reconcikd .. ,).
Funcbmcmall y.lhc hUIll:! n being
:llw:I}'S lives in a SI:lI e of depcndency o r coullt er
dependency: he i5 dcpcnc\t;nl on his model
(wI1:IIc\'cr it 111 :l )' be: model of :lnic)Il, social or
imaginary project), but. :11 the :o:1I11e lime. perina
nendy challengi ng th:1I l1Iodel. l ie is Il1Ol.i":lI cd and
cOlll1tcr mori\aled in the same 1l1()\'emcnt . There
is no need for psychology or psycho:lI1:ll ys is or,
indced. :l.Il y hlll1l:1Il science.: for lhis. Thc .. c scicnccs
67
JEAN BAUORlllARO
CX ISt only 10 reconci le the irreconcilable. t\ s :1
cOnSC(l lH:: nce, human bcings do :llw:l\'s bOlh \\'h:11
< ,
they need LO for lheir model 10 succeed :md all
that is necessary for it 10 fa il. Here agai n. there's
no need of :l ny weakening or or de:l th
dri ve. It is from [hei r primal duality Ih:1I hum:1I1
bei ngs derive this :l lwl.goni stic energy. Thi s is the
n Onl1:l1 hum;ln bei ng :lnd everything rh:lt sets
abom reconcil ing him with himself ;lnci finding ;l
solUTion TO the Icillest.ions raised above is of the
order of superstition :l nd mystification. "
The ABNOH,i\ j t\L individ u:l1 tOday is the
one who nuw livcs onl y in a unilal eral positive
adherence 10 what he is or what he docs. Total
subjection and adjuslmcm
14
(the perfcctly nor-
mali zed bci ng) . Countlcss indi\' idllals have gone
o\"er 10 realil\'. tu t.heir own rcalin', b\' elil11i nat -
. , ,
ing all considerati on of lhe dual and the
insoluble. And the mystcry of t.hi s positivc crys-
I:lUi z:u ion, of this suspension of doubt :1bom the
rcal - necessarik real- world rem:l1ns ennre.
,
68
j
WHY HASN'T EVE RYT HING MR( AOY DISAPPfAR(O ?
T his raises the whole (llleSllOn of the intell i)!;encc
of Evil.
\\:'e an.: simplifi ed by technicalmanipubtion.
r\nd thi s simpl ification goes off on a crn}'
course \\hel1 we reach digiral manipul :uiun.
What beCOmeS:ll t.hi s point of the vCTltrilo-
'-luKit)' of It is the S:ll11e wilh the r:ldical -
iSIll of yun::; when it desert s The individual.
reconcil ed with himself :lnd humogenized by t.he
good offices o f the digital. and when all criri c:d
thinking has di s:l ppe:mx l, radi cali sm passes into
thi ngs. The vcmriloC]uacil), of Evi l IXlsses into
tech nolugy i tscl f.
For duality can be neit her climin:l1 cd nor
liquidat ed- it is rhe rul e of the game. Th e ruk of
:1 kind of inviulable pact Ih:1I lhc revcrsi bil-
ity of things.
I f their own duplicity desert s human beings.
t.hen the roles :l rc reversed: it is the machine Ihat
goes gag:l, that fal lers and bccolllcs perverse,
69
JEAN BAUOR!llARO
(il:lhnhc. n ;lltnlo(llIou:-. The d l l p l i c l r ~ merrih
!-!OC'i ovcr to thc othcr side.
If !'ublectl\"c Iro!1\' disappears-and H dl !'-
appears 111 the play of the (lIgllal- then irony be-
comes ubjccli\T. Or It becomes silence.
I' 1111 111.(,]"1'(. \\ \,:. 1111 \\(llm. It was onl\
:lfterward" thar th(' Sikncc camc.
The end It self h:lS cllsappc:ucd ...
jmll((lf) !()(r
70